SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : General Topics : Divorce and Remarriage

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread
lastblast
Member



Joined: 2004/10/16
Posts: 528
Michigan

 Re:

Quote:
If an unbeliever departs and then remarries someone else, then the Christian is free to marry again. (Don't go beyond what is "written").



But that is not what Paul stated. Counselling this to someone would be going beyond what is written.

Quote:
The majority of scholars on this verse, say that the "sexual immorality" (fornication) happens "during" the marriage, and not prior.



The majority of the Christian Church in the 1st/2nd century believed and practiced the indissoluability of marriage (before the formation of the RC church, just to be clear). Even when a spouse was "put away" for adultery, the marriage was not considered dissolved. Only death dissolved marriage and freed one to remarry.

Quote:
and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.



What do you make of this part(b) of Mt. 19:9? Most churches today tell the woman who has been put away that she may remarry (since she was wrongly divorced and her husband has remarried), yet it appears from the text that the woman is forbidden to remarry and whoever marries her is committing adultery.

Quote:
How this verse being taking so far out from it's meaning, I don't know.



Mt. 1:18-24 probably contributes to how this passage gets interpreted, since it did happen that a woman could be 'put away' who hadn't even consummated a marriage yet. Another passage that contributes to a more narrower viewpoint would be Rom. 7:2-3. Paul shows a woman who is remarried/an adulteress, yet never mentions anything besides death which frees her from her marriage bond. The current popular interpretation of Mt. 19:9 is at odds with what Paul preached in Rom. 7 and I Cor. 7:39. Blessings in Him, Cindy


_________________
Cindy

 2005/9/7 20:02Profile
roadsign
Member



Joined: 2005/5/2
Posts: 3776


 Re: Opinions ad nauseum

Back to GrannyAnnie who wrote:

Quote:
But I almost started a thread titled ... "Opinion is Sin".


I dare you!
Of course that no one believes that their convictions are opinions. (I don't)

It's been said, If you want to know how to raise kids, ask someone who hasn't had any yet. They will have lots and lots and lots to say. It's like that with any life experience - including martital challenges.
There is nothing like real life experience to silence us. Then we realize how much we don't have the answers, and how even the right answers don't help. That's when we are on our faces before God - pleading for his mercy and help.

Very few get married with plans to unmarry. I can't tell you how many separated people tell me that they never wanted it to go that way. All too many find themselves in this unbearable turmoil of breaking relationships and no no way out of the stalemate, no way out of the pain other than to run. They feel stuck. It is real! And for many it is horrible! So they don't need a theological lecture. They need real human people to be as Christ to them, to show them what the Lord is like - He who said, "I am your husband. I will woe you." And that is exactly what happens to many. I love hearing them share their journey - of how Christ woed them to himself in the midst of their marriage troubles.

Often separation is the only way that marriage partners can unravel their tangled-up, emmeshed relationship and start to see what has been happening, and then figure out how they need to change.

It would be nice if they could all reunite, but let's face reality - it just can't always be so. We have to accept that and move on.

And we can stop hanging the big letter [b][size=large][color=CC3300]D[/color][/size][/b] around their neck - and see other aspects of their lives, their character, their dreams, hopes, faith, etc.
Diane


_________________
Diane

 2005/9/7 20:29Profile
lastblast
Member



Joined: 2004/10/16
Posts: 528
Michigan

 Re:

Quote:
It would be nice if they could all reunite, but let's face reality - it just can't always be so. We have to accept that and move on. And we can stop hanging the big letter D around their neck - and see other aspects of their lives, their character, their dreams, hopes, faith, etc.
Diane



Diane,

I am part of an online support group filled with [size=large][font=Verdana]D[/font][/size]ivorced people. It is the most faith filled, forgiving, trusting in the Lord group of people I have ever met in my life............and they ALL believe in the permanency of marriage---til death. In any case, being divorced is not the issue of the opening post, though I do know many want to keep the focus there to avoid the bigger, more difficult issue of remarital adultery.


_________________
Cindy

 2005/9/7 21:04Profile









 Re:

[Quote]:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But I almost started a thread titled ... "Opinion is Sin".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I dare you!





Glad you joined SI. In other words, glad you're here.

And since you've been here a few months before me and probably don't have leprosy like I do (ha), maybe you should start the thread and I'll hop along besides ya. :-D


Love,
Annie

 2005/9/7 22:23









 Re: Wiping smile off.....

Oops, didn't mean for that big silly grin to show up on the homepage under such a serious subject.

Reposting here to wipe it off.


sorry.

 2005/9/7 22:58
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
You have said what new birth does not do. Could you elaborate on what it does do, please?

EDIT: I mean, do to present and past marriage relationships.


I don't believe it does anything directly to present or past 'marriage' relationships. Regeneration changes a person's nature; I am still my father's son, and my son's father, and my wife's husband. None of these relationships is altered directly by regeneration.

Paul uses some very challenging language in the topic of marital relationships. ““For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.” (1Cor. 7:7, NKJV) The word gift here is 'charisma'. Apparently we are all charismatics, ;-) if we are male or female. Later Paul gives the general counsel:“But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches. Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it.” (1Cor. 7:17-21, NKJV)This passage ends with a reference to slavery but began in the context of marital patterns. It seems to be that marital relations are unaltered by 'regeneration' in itself; obviously new birth changes people in every aspect but not in the formal relationships of marriage or family.

If Neilgin's thesis were correct this would produce extraordinary complications. If regeneration creates physical virginity what does it do to the marriage that was consumated? does it have to be re-consumated and what does it do to the children who have been fathered/mothered?

I do think it is important to remember that the early church did not 'do marriages'. As Christendom (not Christianity) became more controlling the visible church became involved in marriages, annulments and re-marriages, but we must not have the 17th century Anglican marriage ceremony in our minds when we read these passages.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/9/8 4:40Profile









 Ron Bailey

you wrote:

Quote:
Without joining a 'side' in this, I think Neilgin's 'born again virgin' concept is also mistaken.



really?


what then does a being a "new man in Christ" mean?

If all sin and immorality are washed away in the Blood of Christ, and one is born again, is not an infant a virgin?

 2005/9/8 19:44









 Ron Bailey part two

Quote:
If Neilgin's thesis were correct this would produce extraordinary complications. If regeneration creates physical virginity what does it do to the marriage that was consumated? does it have to be re-consumated and what does it do to the children who have been fathered/mothered?



Ronnie old man, number one, it's Neil, neilgin1 is a standardized thingy I use for cyber stuff. My last name is Giuntoli, blah blah blah, bing bing bing.

number two, you're thinking too much. I don't mean that in an anti-intellectual way, or an anti-theophilosophical way, but you're thinking too much.


there are no extraordinary complications in my thesis, because there is no thesis, only a promise from God and that promise is that I'm born again, made NEW in Christ, its THAT simple.

It doesn't need a lot of theological expositon, God's promises, His covenant promises are extremely simple.

If I am made anew, born again....let me describe it, Paul references a physical circumsion, and a circumsion of the heart, so does Jeremiah. Implication being that when one is born again, justified, with their sins washed away in the Atoning Blood of the Messiah Jesus, they are a new being.

On a personal level, since I was born again, I've been intimate with Jesus only. My most personal heart connecting with His heart, struggles, victories and burdens, being caught up in high places with God.

Someday, I may meet a woman, who is walking in this most holy faith, equally yoked, and into that union, that marriage, I will bring myself, and she will know that I have not sullied (God willing) my body subsequent to rebirth.

If you or anyone else think I'm mistaken in this conviction, so be it. A person can cut Scripture any way they want, its the dialogue that happens in the secret place between you and God that matters.

Everything else is just white noise and palaber.

I say all the above with respect and love.

 2005/9/8 20:11









 Re: Divorce and Remarriage

Quote:
I don't believe it does anything directly to present or past 'marriage' relationships. Regeneration changes a person's nature; I am still my father's son, and my son's father, and my wife's husband. None of these relationships is altered directly by regeneration.

There can be no argument about one's physical parentage or children, but the previous accord in these relationship may be shattered, may it not? Or, lack of accord, restored - [i]because[/i] of regeneration. The Spirit cannot be boxed off away from the flesh completely.

I hope you're not going to say I've taken this verse out of context - but please tell me if I am. I have found it a great blessing to know that my body, my flesh, can be [i]subject[/i] to the Spirit and can be [i]quickened[/i] by the Spirit.

Romans 8
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead [u]shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit[/u] that dwelleth in you.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.


Here are three relationships in the Old Testament, in which the status quo altered from what it had been, because in each relationship, one person obeyed/sought/worshipped God.

[u]Judges 6: 25, 26[/u]
And it came to pass the same night, that the LORD said unto him, [Gideon]
'Take thy father's young bullock, even the second bullock of seven years old, [u]and[/u] throw down the altar of Baal that thy father hath, [u]and[/u] cut down the grove that is by it: [u]and[/u] build an altar unto the LORD thy God upon the top of this rock, in the ordered place, [u]and[/u] take the second bullock, [u]and[/u] offer a burnt sacrifice with the wood of the grove which thou shalt cut down'.

[u]Genesis 32:30[/u]

[u]And Jacob[/u] called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Genesis 33:3, 4
And he passed over before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. [u]And Esau[/u] ran to meet him, and embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed him: [u]and they wept[/u].

[u]2 Samuel 6[/u]
16 And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; [u]and she despised him in her heart[/u].
20 Then David returned to bless his household. And Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David, and said, How glorious was the king of Israel to day, who uncovered himself to day in the eyes of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly uncovereth himself!
3 [u]Therefore Michal[/u] the daughter of Saul [u]had no child[/u] unto the day of her death.


Further, if a person has been involved in [i]wrong[/i] sexual relationships previously, they are [i]expected[/i] to stop - [u]because[/u] of regeneration. Marriage must be the [i]only[/i] type of sexual relationship which [i]can[/i] survive across the regeneration barrier - if the unbeliever wants it to.

 2005/9/8 22:19









 Re: Divorce and Remarriage

philologos said

Quote:
I do think it is important to remember that the early church did not 'do marriages'. As Christendom (not Christianity) became more controlling the visible church became involved in marriages, annulments and re-marriages, but [b]we must not have the 17th century Anglican marriage ceremony in our minds when we read these passages[/b].

This is helpful.

In an earlier post, you sought to define marriage without actually defining it. :-( In these discussions (other threads) I've wanted to define marriage too, but the [u]public religious ceremony[/u] (registration) seems to [i]interfere considerably[/i] with the [i]meaning[/i] of marriage as a statement of physical relationship between two people, which has/had a serious component of unfulfilled sexual desire initiating and motivating it.

This gets all the more complicated, if those participating are no longer virgins, because I've concluded (Ha! the obvious!) that sexual fulfilment is intended to be addictive. It's a tragedy when this addiction is sparked off inappropriately before marriage, as it can only lead to physical, emotional and psychological distress. If there is any kindness in God, either there has to be 'marriage' (to avoid fornication) or, healing, or, [u]re[/u]marriage?.

Are there conditions under which remarriage can be justified, or, would stating them be too delicate a matter?

 2005/9/8 22:31





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy